[Freedombox-discuss] Freedombox CA

Simo s at ssimo.org
Thu Sep 12 23:37:08 UTC 2013


On Thu, 2013-09-12 at 15:48 -0700, cgw993 at aol.com wrote:
> " I am sure I wrote more GNU GPL software than you did." - Ok but how
> does that relate to my statement that I am grateful for people that
> stick to the GPL?

It looked to me like a way of implying "unlike others that propose
non-GPL libraries". It's not like OpenSSL is proprietary or anything.

And I am also grateful to people that stick to the GPL, I see it
especially important for applications, however in the case of crypto
libraries, I personally prefer a license that has no compatibilty
issues. Crypto is extremely important and difficult to get right and you
want to have the maximum possible adoption of a good implementation
without any possible or perceived barrier.

Simo.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Simo [mailto:s at ssimo.org] 
> Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2013 3:22 PM
> To: cgw993 at aol.com
> Cc: freedombox-discuss at lists.alioth.debian.org; keith at sd-kvm.me4.it
> Subject: Re: [Freedombox-discuss] Freedombox CA
> 
> On Thu, 2013-09-12 at 13:58 -0700, cgw993 at aol.com wrote:
> > Thank god there are still people that stick to and defend the GNU Gpl
> 
> I am sure I wrote more GNU GPL software than you did.
> 
> If it were a matter of license incompatibility then you could also choose the NSS library (formerly from mozilla) which is used in all major browsers (so you already use it every day).
> 
> It has a different but equally awful API than OpenSSL, but has received also a ton more scrutiny and certification than GnuTLS.
> 
> Understand that I have nothing against GnuTLS per se, it just lacks tons of features and scrutiny that openssl and NSS already have.
> 
> Simo.
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Freedombox-discuss 
> > [mailto:freedombox-discuss-bounces+cgw993=aol.com at lists.alioth.debian.
> > org] On Behalf Of Daniel Kahn Gillmor
> > Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2013 1:52 PM
> > To: Simo
> > Cc: freedombox-discuss at lists.alioth.debian.org; keith at sd-kvm.me4.it
> > Subject: Re: [Freedombox-discuss] Freedombox CA
> > 
> > On 09/12/2013 04:40 PM, Simo wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2013-09-12 at 15:13 +0100, keith at sd-kvm.me4.it wrote:
> > >> Gnutls may be usable as an alternative to Openssl.
> > >> It's already in Debian, new to me.
> > > 
> > > What's wrong with OpenSSL that GNUTLS get's right ?
> > 
> >  * Licensing that is not deliberately incompatible with the GPL.
> > 
> >  * A sane and modern library API (granted, parts of OpenSSL are have 
> > these features too; most projects are mired in the horror, though)
> > 
> >  * delegation of specific tasks to other libraries, rather than kitchen-sink agglomeration.
> > 
> > There are probably other reasons.
> > 
> > 	--dkg
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Freedombox-discuss mailing list
> > Freedombox-discuss at lists.alioth.debian.org
> > http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-dis
> > cuss
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Freedombox-discuss mailing list
> Freedombox-discuss at lists.alioth.debian.org
> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss






More information about the Freedombox-discuss mailing list